Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34138823›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational and environmental medicine2021

COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Intent Among Emergency Healthcare Workers: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

Maria L Pacella-LaBarbara, Yunseo Linda Park, P Daniel Patterson, Ankur Doshi, Maria Koenig Guyette, Ambrose H Wong, Bernard P Chang, Brian P Suffoletto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. COVID-19 vaccination up-take in three districts of Nepal.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Maria L Pacella-LaBarbaraUniversity of Pittsburgh, Department of Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Dr Pacella-LaBarbara, Ms Park, Dr Patterson, Dr Doshi, and Dr Guyette); Yale School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut (Dr Wong); Columbia University Irving Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, New York, New York (Dr Chang); Stanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Palo Alto, Stanford, California (Dr Suffoletto).
Yunseo Linda Park
P Daniel Patterson
Ankur Doshi
Maria Koenig Guyette
Ambrose H Wong
Bernard P Chang
Brian P Suffoletto

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Institutional Career Development CoreKL2TR001862 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CANTLEY, LLOYD G, EDELMAN, E. JENNIFER · 2016 to 2025
$12.2M
An in-depth Examination of the Psychological Processes involved in the Transition from Acute to Chronic Pain after a Traumatic Musculoskeletal InjuryK01AR073300 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI PACELLA, MARIA LYNN · 2019 to 2024
$670k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001862NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIAMS NIH HHS K01 AR073300
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveVaccine hesitancy limits population protection from SARS-CoV (coronavirus disease [COVID-19]). Vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCW) could put patients and coworkers at risk.

methodsWe surveyed 475 emergency department and emergency medical service workers from January to February 2021 to determine vaccine intent/uptake, perceived COVID-19 vulnerability, and factors associated with vaccine intent/uptake.

resultsAlthough 79% of HCWs received or had plans to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, 21% had no intent/were unvaccinated; intent/uptake was lower among females (odds ratio [OR] = 0.34) and those with a history of COVID-19 infection (OR = 0.55), and higher among those with advanced degrees (OR = 3.53) and high perceived COVID-19 vulnerability (OR = 1.99).

conclusionsThis study provides a timely assessment of vaccination status among frontline HCWs and highlights subgroups who may be at high risk of exposure and transmission.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesCOVID-19 VaccinesCross-Sectional StudiesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansSARS-CoV-2VaccinationCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccines

Identifiers

PMID34138823
PMCPMC8478093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.